Introduction

The Contemporary Threat

Sharia is a totalizing socio-political-legal system (“the path”) that seeks to govern public life—law, politics, economics, society, and war—not just private devotion. Within Islam there is a core fault line:

• Reform-minded Muslims and authentic moderates (e.g., figures like Indonesia’s Abdurrahman Wahid) treat Sharia as personal guidance compatible with pluralism and with a separation of spiritual and secular spheres.

• Supremacists/Islamists (some violent, others stealthy) seek to impose an immutable, compulsory Sharia as the basis for a global Islamic state (caliphate). For them, Western constitutional systems are obstacles to overcome, not polities to coexist with.

Security Implications

1. Sharia-adherent supremacists are a mainstream, dynamic current in Islam.

   • a. Textual rooting: Sharia is firmly grounded in doctrinal sources and favored by influential commentators and institutions (e.g., al-Azhar’s scholarly tradition).

   • b. State and network backing: For decades, states (notably Saudi Arabia and Iran) and disciplined international organizations (notably the Muslim Brotherhood) have heavily financed and propagated it.

   • c. No central authority: Because Islam lacks a universally recognized hierarchy, authentic reformers face an uphill battle to delegitimize Sharia where it matters most—among Muslims themselves.

   Result: Regardless of what percentage of Muslims personally adhere to it, Sharia’s political program punches above its weight and poses a serious U.S. security concern—even if one assumes it is not the predominant Muslim ideology everywhere.

2. Empowering authentic moderates requires clarity, not wishful thinking.

   • Do not “fictionalize” Islam’s internal landscape in hopes reality will conform to a benign narrative.

   • Reset the definition of moderation around the Sharia fault line: identify and marginalize actors who seek to impose Sharia, even if they self-brand as “moderate.”

3. Protect the nation regardless of Islam’s internal resolution.

   • The U.S. can better support non-Sharia-adherent Muslims (natural allies), but cannot win their internal struggle for them.

   • Whether or not Sharia is delegitimized globally, the U.S. must face it down at home and abroad wherever it mounts violent or ideological offensives.

Sharia is Anti-constitutional

Advancing Sharia’s political-legal program in America conflicts with the Constitution and amounts to sedition, whether through violence (jihad) or through dawa (stealthy subversion). Sharia rejects:

• Popular sovereignty—the governed making law for themselves

• Constitutional republican democracy

• Freedom of conscience and individual liberty (including privacy and sexual preference)

• Freedom of expression (including the right to analyze and criticize Sharia)

• Economic liberty and private property

• Equal treatment under law (men/women; Muslims/non-Muslims)

• Freedom from cruel and unusual punishments and a common-sense, unequivocal rejection of terrorism

• Resolution of political disputes through federalism and democratic processes rather than violence

An internal Muslim Brotherhood memorandum describes a long-term “civilization jihad”—a “settlement process” inside the United States aimed at eliminating and destroying Western civilization from within through subversion and sabotage by the hands of its own people and sympathizers. This concept is often called “stealth jihad.”

Lessons from the Cold War

America previously confronted not only hostile regimes but also ideologically driven domestic networks (e.g., CPUSA) aligned with foreign powers. Measures that helped blunt penetration included:

• The Smith Act of 1940 (criminalizing certain subversive activity)

• The McCarran-Walter Act of 1952 (immigration/exclusion and deportation on ideological grounds)

• Registration requirements, exclusions from sensitive government posts, and extensive counterintelligence penetration

Later, Supreme Court doctrine and subsequent immigration laws narrowed ideological exclusions, extending protections to “advocacy” and to non-citizens’ speech. Even if one assumes some earlier excesses, those precautions are inadequate today against clandestine, transnational networks cloaked in religion, exploiting:

• Intimidation effects of terrorism and targeted violence

• Instant global communications

• Increasing availability of mass-destruction methods that let fewer actors project more power

Missteps Have Compounded the Danger

Across administrations of both parties, U.S. leadership has:

• Focused on kinetic terrorism (e.g., al-Qaeda tactics) while neglecting the supremacist ideology that animates it.

• Underestimated complementary subversion by groups that share jihadi goals but currently prefer “pre-violent” methods. Stealth tactics are designed to prepare the U.S. battlefield for later coercion and, if necessary, violence.

• Neglected doctrinal study, leading to strategies that fight bombers and plots, yet miss the political-legal transformation Sharia aims to impose.

The Bottom Line

Without doctrinal clarity and policy adjustments, the U.S. risks winning battles but losing the war. Sharia-adherent networks—especially the Muslim Brotherhood—are deeply embedded and skilled at leveraging civil liberties and multicultural norms to advance their program within America. The way forward is to:

• Name the ideology and its methods (violent and stealthy)

• Map and counter its political, legal, financial, educational, and cultural lines of effort

• Harden vulnerabilities in institutions and law while preserving constitutional freedoms

• Keep American law—and American freedoms—Sharia-free through a determined, sustained program at home and principled resistance abroad

---